Response to "Firewood" by John McPhee
Joanne Goodall
John McPhee's article, Firewood, is a great example of good story-telling. It is easy to read and to understand because McPhee puts you into the context of the story by explaining what a cord of wood is, what the setting was like in New York during the oil crisis, and what these people would have been thinking during that time. He doesn't seem to hold any information back. Most journalists only have 300-500 words to write what information they have on a particular story in a newspaper, however, McPhee can write for days. How can he do this? What makes a simple story about selling firewood so perfect?
One thing I give a lot of credit to McPhee is his interview choices. He is able to go through the "Joe Blows" and find a regular everyday guy or gal and tell us their story. In this case, he was able to take an important topic, the oil crisis, and make it into a people story by telling us what they had gone through, not basic facts about oil conservation and prices on the rise. The best part of the article was McPhee's use of humour and sarcasm to voice the people he interviewed. For example, he tells us a story about a woman wanting to put a cord into her pinto. I've been around trees my whole life (my father cuts trees for a living) so I knew right off the bat that there was no way in hell she could manage that. And you would be surprised to hear how many people ask about washroom facilities I the woods for workers. I wonder, as a journalism student, where McPhee finds his subjects? Does he go up to random strangers, asking them how their day was and how they felt about the oil crisis? Does he interview family, friends, or friends of both?
I am also impressed by McPhee's writing talents because he is able to take any topic, it seems, and write a 3,000 word article about it. Who knew a man could write that much about firewood, geology/geography, and oranges for that amount of time? How much research is involved? Was McPhee always this annal about detail?
This story is a "feel-good story" at the beginning. McPhee made me laugh during the cord in a pinto incident, about bathrooms in the forest, and electrical outlets in the forest as well. I wonder, if anyone knew during this time anything about the forest and collecting firewood? I'm going to assume no, that New York citizens wouldn't be able to follow McPhee's story during this time because they never burned firewood before. I, on the other hand, lived around chopped wood. Every winter, my family gets firewood to heat my house. Though I enjoy fire places, my house just had a wood furnace and it was my job to help dad split the wood with a splitter and to put the firewood downstairs into our basement. McPhee could have easily done a hard news clip about the oil crisis but he chose not to. Instead, he was able to capture real people and their stories. I wonder what their interviews sound like? I'm always curious to know what the person I am interviewing is going to sound like and to see if they like that way they sound as wll.
Joanne Goodall
John McPhee's article, Firewood, is a great example of good story-telling. It is easy to read and to understand because McPhee puts you into the context of the story by explaining what a cord of wood is, what the setting was like in New York during the oil crisis, and what these people would have been thinking during that time. He doesn't seem to hold any information back. Most journalists only have 300-500 words to write what information they have on a particular story in a newspaper, however, McPhee can write for days. How can he do this? What makes a simple story about selling firewood so perfect?
One thing I give a lot of credit to McPhee is his interview choices. He is able to go through the "Joe Blows" and find a regular everyday guy or gal and tell us their story. In this case, he was able to take an important topic, the oil crisis, and make it into a people story by telling us what they had gone through, not basic facts about oil conservation and prices on the rise. The best part of the article was McPhee's use of humour and sarcasm to voice the people he interviewed. For example, he tells us a story about a woman wanting to put a cord into her pinto. I've been around trees my whole life (my father cuts trees for a living) so I knew right off the bat that there was no way in hell she could manage that. And you would be surprised to hear how many people ask about washroom facilities I the woods for workers. I wonder, as a journalism student, where McPhee finds his subjects? Does he go up to random strangers, asking them how their day was and how they felt about the oil crisis? Does he interview family, friends, or friends of both?
I am also impressed by McPhee's writing talents because he is able to take any topic, it seems, and write a 3,000 word article about it. Who knew a man could write that much about firewood, geology/geography, and oranges for that amount of time? How much research is involved? Was McPhee always this annal about detail?
This story is a "feel-good story" at the beginning. McPhee made me laugh during the cord in a pinto incident, about bathrooms in the forest, and electrical outlets in the forest as well. I wonder, if anyone knew during this time anything about the forest and collecting firewood? I'm going to assume no, that New York citizens wouldn't be able to follow McPhee's story during this time because they never burned firewood before. I, on the other hand, lived around chopped wood. Every winter, my family gets firewood to heat my house. Though I enjoy fire places, my house just had a wood furnace and it was my job to help dad split the wood with a splitter and to put the firewood downstairs into our basement. McPhee could have easily done a hard news clip about the oil crisis but he chose not to. Instead, he was able to capture real people and their stories. I wonder what their interviews sound like? I'm always curious to know what the person I am interviewing is going to sound like and to see if they like that way they sound as wll.